Lets Discuss CENSORSHIP And Apologies... Mr. Decker

Recently, I have become embroiled in heated exchanges with some forum posters. After a long ton of personal attacks, I lapsed. Of course, this is no excuse. Personal attacks are inappropriate and a waste of time. This apology is not meant for those who matched me swing for swing... but for those who had to endure the churlish displays. Perhaps my fellow mudslingers will join me at the podium... well, maybe not. -- Mr. Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), June 30, 1999

To continue...

1) You might offer a real heart-felt apology to Lisa... rather than a sorta apology... to everyone else.

2) A big gesture on your part would be to offer a real one to Hardliner as well.

I dont expect one to me for the following viscousness...

Dianne (MBA),

I have more experience with snipers and small unit tactics than with "Yanni" and the healing power of crystals. While I know rational thought strains your new age mind, try this. It's impossible to defend a fixed position, even with Feng Shui. When a well-armed, motivated aggressor force wants to take your Y2K supplies, a cup of warm chamomille tea will not soothe them into leaving. Quoting Kahlil Gibran will force even the most merciful of raiders shoot you.

Pray, meditate, project astrally, become one with the Gaia... whatever it is you do, Dianne. Ask the Great Spirit to save us from a post-Apocalyptic world. This way you'll be free to pursue your alternative though patterns without the messy business of reality.

Regards,

-- Mr. Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), June 28, 1999.

But... it would be nice.

And I would be surprised if you offered one directly to Big Dog for...

Ah, our jackboots come into the light. Big Dodger and Dianne Squire, MBA. Who else is on the "home team?" No "heretics," I presume. (laughter)

Not too much of a stretch, is it, BD? I imagine the robes of SysOp fit nicely on you. Perhaps Dianne can tell you about your past lives? I can imagine you have worn the robes before... extracting confessions during the Inquisition perhaps? Keeping the common folk from the Scriptures while peddling indulgences? Playing the politics of imperialism, all in the name of the Holy Church?

I recognize you now, Brother Russell, with your sincere eyes and soft hands. Enjoy your church, BD... I just hope Dante was right.

On to lighter work... Lisa. Rattled? Hardly. I just hope you take a moment to thank the men and women who served so you could prattle on about how terrible America is. Like a spoiled child, you treat poorly the freedoms you never had to earn.

Of course, here I am talking about freedom in a private club. Close the windows, folks, and keep out the light.

Regards,

-- Mr. Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), June 28, 1999.

But, as youve learned... or not... by now... it was those comments to Lisa that really annoyed many.

How big are you Mr. Decker?

And, BTW, Mr. Decker, I DO apologize to you for being in a knee-jerk mood... all be it with extreme provocation, lately.

Doc been absent of late. Been sparing with them MIT types over
hosting TB2000 ya know. Getting nowhere as one might figure. Phil had
the best comeback so far,,,,"don't sweat it, it will all be over by
January" not a direct quote but close.

MIT geeks now "doing something" at least I naively hope, right. Doing
what? getting TB2000 off taxpayer supported information infrastructure
over at MIT for starters. I got a problem with a place where the
players condone the impending deaths of BILLIONS of our fellow humans,
us too I am told, us dumbasses the Pollys. But then again, these
people think this event is preparable. I say you need to think-LYE-
TRENCHES-SURGICAL MASKS, or your are stroking yourself. Forget the
barrels and seeds, yur gunna need backhoes folks.

[snip]

The BILLIONS dead thing done it for me. How can one even answer
anything in this environment? Debunk? for what possible reason? Why
waste one's time? All the freaking evidence one could EVER need is
here and at BIFFY concern Y2k being basically a web-marketing scheme.

Not to fret, Doc be around just the same.

Doc_Paulie@ihateclowns.com

So... Mr. Decker,

In my opinion, that is the most blatant form of CENSORSHIP around, Mr.
Decker!

But are you... or ANY of the trolls from De Bunker who are spreading
trash here... yelling Censorship over there?

Although, in lieu of an apology, I would like Mr. Decker to share
with us why he's so intent on "de-programming" us.

BTW, I was not referring to America in that post. I was
replacing Deck's words with what I inferred to be his true
concerns.... (and rightfully): The Fractional Reserve Scheme and
banking in general, rather than the Commonweal of the nation.

Why don't you spend a little bit of time collecting responses made to
a post from either Mr. Decker or myself, by Andy, Ray, King of Spain,
or Will continue. You should be able to find several hundred within a
very short time.

Now, I defy you to find even *one* such post that any decent person
wouldn't say calls for an apology. You'll have hundreds to choose
from, or thousands if you spend over an hour.

The fact that you attack Decker for apologizing for occasional
harshness, while studiously avoiding *any* mention of the avalanche
of gratuitous and crude insults from your fellow church members,
brands you a total idiot.

I don't often express myself so bluntly, but sometimes there is no
suitable euphemism. You are closed-minded, self-righteous and
flagrantly playing favorites.

When such a person has moderator powers, and feels "her" forum is most
threatened by one of the most reasonable voices here, and never
deigns to notice the constant mud being slung by those who
all happen to be at the doomer extreme, there is ample reason to be
upset. You are a judged clothed in a white sheet and pointed hood.
The applause you expect from your sycophants cannot disguise the
disgrace you have brought upon yourself.

Actually, I think BOTH of you (and an awful lot of the other
regulars) do an almost unbelievable job of remaining 'cool'. I openly
admit, this subject boils my blood. It goes against my character to
'calmly' take a stand on anything with the potential magnitude for
disaster that this subject has. The level of patience you display is
admirable. Don't even expect it from me.....just can't do it. Tried
it once. Very painful. Too dangerous to my health.

Oh my, Flint. Doing your imitation of a 'door mat' again? I would
offer you an apology, if I'd ever said anything that I was sorry for,
to either YOU or DECKER. Geeeese. I've offered one to FM and one to
JAW. You just don't require one....or I'd be certain to give one to
you as well. Tough.

As Flint describes, I spent some months where every post I made was
met with unceasing personal attacks. Only on rare occasion did
anyone confront the attackers. The attacks included "liar,"
"hypocrite," "moron," "coward," "idiot," (in fact, the list is quite
long and rather creative.) Some of the attacks came from members of
the current moderating "team." One repeated slur was that I was
either "dense" or "dishonest."

It was wrong to abandon my policy of polite detachment and engage in
mud slinging. I regret losing my temper.

I think your request for a personal apology, however, is an attemt to
rub salt in the wound. While my attacks were not justified, they
were clearly provoked from my first post on this forum. If the
provacateurs wish to mend fences, I will respond in kind. In your
case, Diane, I am willing to meet you the middle for a burying of the
hatchet (somewhere other than in my skull.)

This is the first time I have read the post from Doc Paulie about his
alleged conversation with MIT. This is one I need to read carefully
before commenting.

Finally, what am I doing that is "deprogramming?" I disagree with
what I consider the more "fringe" positions on this forum. I do not
work for the banking industry, although I am a customer. I rather
like having an account and the benefits it offers.

the small man is governed by law.the gentleman is governed by
propriety.the sage is governed by virtue,and the perfected sage is
governed by Tao.when the common man hears this,he laughs.if it were
not laughed at,it would not be Tao.-Lao Tzu,from Tao te ching

The Decker-door-mat. If you've been so horribly treated...from day
one, why don't you just wave bye-bye and we'll wave ALOHA! But do not
expect me to give you 'another' lei. You dinked around teasing us
about leaving yesterday, and now you will have to go leiless. I have
6" of water in my barn and am grumpy and irritated by your continued
presence, please excuse me.

"Just shag me" Squire you must be a guy because YOU HAVE SOME BALLS
to make your statements on this thread! You attempt to back-hand Mr.
Decker but your own hypocrisy undoes you.

Have you apologized to Mutha and the others you inserted comments in
there posts? Have you apologized to Cherri for being to stupid to
know how the internet works? Have you apologized for trying to SET ME
UP with your made-up threads THAT ARE OUT OF ORDER? [Don't change the
subject. No links to somewhere else, I've read them. None of your "we
know your IP" You see what I want you to see. answer the question.
HOW DID THE DATES GET OUT OF ORDER ON THOSE POSTS, DIANE? The answer
is YOU fucked with the posts to try to get me on your "delete on
site" kick!]

I think taxpayer money to support this cult gathering SHOULD be cut
off.

Mr. Decker showed just HOW MUCH bigger he is than you. I was
considering being more civil because of his example. All you can do
is shit on him for it. You piss me off. You and the other wack-0
y2kultists.

This forum is intended for people who are concerned about the impact
of the Y2000 problem on their personal lives, and who want to discuss
various fallback contingency plans with other like-minded people. It's
not intended to provide advice/guidance for solving Y2000 problems
within an IT organization.

Thats like-minded Flint. People who are concerned about Y2K... NOT
people who are NOT concerned about it.

Ever since Ed Yourdon started the forum back in December of 1997, I
believe, it has continued to morph, go through ups and downs, over
under around and through the related--and not so related issues of
Y2K, et. al.--until its present form.

Ed took a very light hand with deleting. But he did delete, when
asked or when necessary. Recently he shared with me...

Re herding cats: actually, when I was doing it, it was more like
being a kindergarten teacher during recess, with a hundred kids all
running around in the playground and getting themselves in various
sorts of minor trouble. It's not possible to supervise anyone, and
it's not even worth the trouble from keeping the kids (mostly the
boys) from getting into little scuffles with one another. It's only
when they get really vulgar with one another -- e.g., pulling their
pants down to expose themselves -- that you have to step in and take
control. Then they all howl and call you names for a few minutes
before returning to their play ...

The other thing to keep in mind is that "recess" will be over 197
days from now, and then it won't matter very much what they were
doing...

Ed

###

Now, for a little more recent history. On May 29th, after returning
from a very disappointing week in Washington, Ed suddenly announced in
his Sayonara, Y2K essay that he was leaving the Y2K scene... for
now. Find... the essay at his web-site:

That move caught everyone on the forum off-guard. And yet its
understandable. Hes since shared why he did it, and I support his
choice.

At that time--and out of every other regular poster--he invited me, to
become the TimeBomb 2000 Forum sysop.

To say I was stunned was an understatement. But, at that time, we
all were.

I said I would to help out, and that Id also think about it overnight
and that Id feel better setting up a Moderating team to help out with
this job, and that Id like to appoint a second keeper of the keys
so-to-speak.

His response was... Okay, you are now the senior sysop. If you
choose to share the burden with other folks, that's up to you.

So, if I had wanted to power grab as you imply, there was my golden
opportunity. However, my preference is building communities and being
part of a team. So, I rapidly set about tapping people to volunteer
for a Moderators team--about 15 or so--and ultimately set up a
private Moderators Forum so we could all communicate.

However, I DID NOT WANT TO BECOME A TROLL TARGET so I made the choice
to remain anonymous, which the Moderator team respected. Several of
them prefer to stay that way, even now, and thats fine with me.

Please, place all this in context.

That weekend we all thought the forum might be closed, so the back-
channel e-mail of about 200 messages was staggering, as regulars and
newcomers grappled with Eds departure and what that would mean to all
of us who were still concerned about the impact of Y2K on our
personal, local, national and international situations.

Diane's two messages are not an "attack" on Mr. Decker. My take on it
is that she is not automatically accepting the apology Mr. Decker
offered. It's Diane's prerogative to accept it or not.

You'll have to admit that Mr. Decker has used personal
characterizations against Diane far more than Diane has against Mr.
Decker (if Diane has actually done so at all). Yes, there are other
people on both side of Y2K issue that should be making apologies, but
the subject today is the apology that Mr. Decker's offered.

My advice to Mr. Decker is the same that I made to him awhile back. A
number of years ago, a white politician made the faux pas of
referring to a black group he was speaking to as "you people". People
on this forum are individuals, and there is a wide diversity of
opinion as to the potential effects of Y2K. If Mr. Decker truly wants
his economic comments heard, he would do well to avoid making broad
characterizations about people that distract attention from those
comments.

You said... You are closed-minded, self-righteous and flagrantly
playing favorites.

Well, I try hard not to be, but whats important is Y2K, in my
opinion, and Mr. Decker tends to mock that. And, there are times when
Ive had enough, and I flare too. You are right. Just now I feel
extremely frustrated. And very uncool.

Not to mention stuck, between a rock and a hard place.

By and large about half the posters posters want no moderating... the
other half want some moderating... the trolls dealt with and the
trashy posts removed. Its not easy, to take the best path.

When you say... When such a person has moderator powers, and feels
"her" forum is most threatened by one of the most reasonable voices
here, and never deigns to notice the constant mud being slung by those
who all happen to be at the doomer extreme, there is ample reason to
be upset. You are a judged clothed in a white sheet and pointed hood.
The applause you expect from your sycophants cannot disguise the
disgrace you have brought upon yourself.

Okay, I can see how you feel that way. The way I feel is that Mr.
Decker, by virtue of hanging out at the De Bunker site, is not being a
reasonable voice.

Perhaps, in this I err. Im human and make mistakes. Doozies!!! (No
kidding).

What you are saying might have a ring of truth to it but the fact
remains that Decker was insulting the forum rather than individual
views. I have said my piece to Decker and accept that he will not stoop
so low as to try continuing the retoric. It is one thing to attack a
persons position and another to attack a person as an individual. Still
another to lump all members of the forum in the same pile. Rediculous

IMHO there are other guilty parties involved but unfortunately you have
added yourself to the list. This is not to say that I agree with
Diane's method on this but your reaction and attack without any reason
on a personal level has reduced you to the level of those you are
attacking. I didn't see your name on a hit list. You should understand
that your views are often not shared by others and except that.

And I know you are smarter than this.

I feel that Decker is guilty and has made his peace (for now :o)

Talk is cheap, actions count.

I think that several apologies are going to be in order after this
settles down.

The forum is greater than the individual parts. And "infighting" in
this manner is counter productive.

I am sure that Dieter will voice the final word on the subject. Someone
has to make sense here **VBG**

I too... regret losing my temper and engage in any mudslinging. And
I will attempt to adopt a policy of polite detachment, as well.

I think your request for a personal apology, however, is an attemt to
rub salt in the wound.

Yes, I think youre right.

For that I apologize. Because you so clearly, post over on the De
Bunker site, I made the error of assuming you necessarily condone the
troll attacks launched from there over to here, and that you support
the actions of Doc Paulie to try and shut down this forum, by
contacting MIT.

Mea culpa.

Mr. Decker, I am also willing to meet you the middle for a burying of
the hatchet (somewhere other than in MY skull.)

I ALSO disagree with what I consider the more "fringe" positions on
this forum, hoever, that appears to be the way it has morphed, and
frankly, I dont know what to DO... if anything... about it.

Actually, I'd say Diane and I are about even on the exchange of
barbs. I just wish the she would quote the invitation on Ed
Yourdon's home page... the wide open welcome to discuss all things
related to Y2K. It was much broader than the preparation focus.

On a related note, every time you use the word, "troll," Diane, I am
reminded of a litany of racial and ethnic slurs. Why do you think I
have gone to such trouble to avoid using the slang of "Doomers" and
"Pollys?" I try substitute optmists and pessimists because they are
far less inflammatory terms.

It's also biased to judge people because they post on other fora. I
visited a number of survivalist sites when I started looking into
Y2K. It didn't make me a survivalist. My participation on an
Internet web page is not an endorsement... no more than my
involvement here is an endorsement of Ed Yourdon.

I do not think you are acting out of malice, Diane. Your posts
sometimes suggest you have not thought through your position. Your
comments about how the moderators are trying to get rid of the
"trolls" indicate this. And even if you decide to define "troll" in
an easily understood manner, I would find it as repugnant as the
infamous "n" word.

With all due respect, I'd ask you to consider how judgemental you
have been towards others... particularly when you weigh in on a
thread long enough to mock someone. It is possible to earn the
respect of the forum, Diane, but it will require a different
approach... and a gentler vocabulary.

With you and the other trolls, I have the hardest time. And take the
deepest issue. You have done nothing, but ridicule, heckle, attack,
flame, and try to trash this forum.

If youll be honest with yourself, for once... you know what I say is
true.

That said, I will EVEN apologize to Mutha, and you posting as another
name, for inserting some [] bracketed comments very early on, asking
you to stop trolling. That was wrong, and inappropriate, and TRUST
me, I was roundly called on the carpet for it. I also, apologize to
Cherri, even though I still saw she and Mutha alternating comments,
very late one night. Perhaps they work together? What I Do know, and
it distresses me, is they are trying very hard, especially you and
Mutha, to trash this forum.

I did not set you up with made-up threads THAT ARE OUT OF ORDER.
Someone did, and it links to your name. But, I apologize if that was
truly NOT you. Someone... then... using your same ISP... made those
posts. And I assumed YOU DID. Sorry.

HOW DID THE DATES GET OUT OF ORDER ON THOSE POSTS, DIANE? The posts
were made at different times and days, but they are all linked to your
name and ISPs (even and anonimizer has an ISP). That, and not the
dates, is how I determined your were posting as Rosie, initially,
then later came back and posted as the Sysop.

BTW, this is not a cult and Id appreciate it, if youd refrain from
so condemning. I have an extreme dislike of cults, and would never
join one.

Now, could you PLEASE quit trolling here? And you tick me off too,
but Ill try to be calmer.

[With the LITTLE time left that we have I think we should devote it
to SERIOUS discussion of y2k and preparations.

Your Pal, Ray]

Ray,

I see you saying this again and again, tell me Ray, who is stopping
you from doing that? Mr. Decker? Flint? Me? You? For somebody who is
so worried about the lack of time and discussion of preps, why did
you WASTE so much time harping at Cherri over her polly report? That
was time that could have been spent talking about rice and beans. Why
do you waste valuable time with this nonsense Ray? Shouldn't you have
started some threads about preps instead of chiming in on this
silliness? Time is short!

Throw not pearls before the pollies and troll swine that seek to do
nothing but disrupt the intent of this forum.

They have NO PLACE HERE.

This forum is NOT A DEMOCRACY...that would be MOB RULE and by the
accounts of these swinish trolls like the new JBD incarnation corrine1
and the condescending Decker, their mob attempts at disruption serves
only to diminish this forum. There are other avenues and forums they
can populate. You folks worry too much about keeping the 1st
Ammendment intact through this forum. In reality Diane, you don't
have to defend that right on a privately run forum. Demanding
specific rules of conduct and discussion is YOUR RIGHT as a SYOP. If
there are those that don't like it, they can move and speak freely
somewhere else. Freedom of speech is not limited to Timebomb2000.

Discussing even whether or not Y2K IS a problem was not the intention
of this forum. I note:Founded by computer expert and noted author, Ed
Yourdon:

This forum is intended for people who are concerned about the
impact of the Y2000 problem on their personal lives, and who want to
discuss various fallback contingency plans with other like-minded
people."

Mr. Yourdon and you thus far have allowed of your own benevolence,
pollyannas, debunkers and trolls to post without restraint. I say
enough is enough.

What's the point of this forum if you have to weed through
demouguoging sludge and debunking information from those that are
convinced Y2K is a non-issue and that we "doomers" are cultists and
dangerous? They want us to go away. They want this forum stopped.
Why do we have to tolerate them at all?

I thought this forum was about fallback planning with like-minded
people? That doesn't mean only those sharing a Milne scenario, but
the posts of Hardliner, Arnie Rimmer, Hallyx and others like them that
are concerned about the impact of Y2K problems but are not subscribers
to TEOTWAWKI, are excellent examples of the kind of debate and info-
sharing

This forum needs to get back to the intended audience and mission it
was started for. Hell, I would appreciate it if this forum could go
back to what it was back last August-September!!! It's JULY 1999!!!
The time for endless debate and troll dodging is over!!!

Let's get back to the reason Ed started this forum in the first place.

And those that don't like it (namely those that wish to spew venom and
division) can take a hike to somewheres else. Who cares if they
scream at us and decry that we're Nazis? They think that anyway! I
don't see ANY tolerance or freedom of expression over at Debunkers or
Biffy's...why should they demand it from us?

Time to get back to the original intent of this forum Diane. You've
had my support for a long time...you still have it. No need to
apologize...it's time for tough love. You have nothing to be guilty
of. Let's do some good, weed-out the chaff and save some lives.

With all due respect, I'd ask you to consider how judgemental you
have been towards others... particularly when you weigh in on a thread
long enough to mock someone. It is possible to earn the respect of the
forum, Diane, but it will require a different approach... and a
gentler vocabulary.

My judgement has been combined with an extreme sadness, vacillating
towards anger, and at other times a shrugging of the shoulders, at
those who really WANT to spray paint this forum with grafitti... and
THOSE WHO APPEAR TO CONDONE THOSE ACTIONS. It has appeared, Mr.
Decker, that you did.

Now, clearly, you have some sway over on the De Bunking forum. Could
you please hold a frank discussion with them and ask them to stop
trying to trash this place?

And conversely, Ill ask that posters here try to be more, civil, but
that is then, their choice, not mine.

Guidelines are posted. And I HATE rules. Yuck!

Even though you, and some see Y2K as no more than a bump, I and
others DO NOT. To each their own assesment. However the diversity of
thought and opinion here, though ALL over the map, is still a
microcosim of the macrocosim. Sorta like this country. Can we
please all agree to disagree?

Its up to individual posters to take responsibility for their own
actions, and reactions.

I don't know about you Unc, but I am getting an awful bad taste in my
mouth just reading this thread.

Diane, I remember your first post on this board. Do you? As I
recall it, you said you wanted to learn more about Y2K and were
worried about how bad it would be. You wanted information, and not
just about storing food. (How much is there to say on that subject,
anyhow? Can it, dry it, freeze dry it or smoke it. And keep insects
and rodents out of it. That about covers the nonelectric storage
methods.) I watched you go down to an '8', then come back up to a
'5'. Now you are so defensive that you seem to take it as a personal
insult if someone disagrees with you. And you are taking a great
deal of satisfaction if someone else insults or harasses people who
have ideas you don't agree with.

Your early posts were filled with a lot of oneness, and advancing in
the spirit ideas. Now I don't know about you, but I don't know of
any spiritual system in the world that approves of the type of
personality changes you have gone through in the last 6 months. I
urge you to step back and relax for a while, go on a retreat or
something. If you keep this up, you will have a nervous breakdown
before 1/1/2000 gets here.

You are probably going to take this as a personal attack. It isn't.
I really am concerned about you.

Remember that little U.S. policy of "Not Negotiating With Terrorists"?
I suggest that you employ that policy towards the debunkers that wish
to take this forum hostage.

You're wasting your time apologizing all over the place to these
people. You're playing their game. And while you may be sincere and
earnest in your efforts, I assure you that they are not. They are not
governed by decency or ethics, they are on a mission to destroy,
debunk and divide this forum. In their eyes, those that hold Y2K is
going to be a problem are EVIL, and need to be silenced. That's their
agenda, that's their mission. You're not going to change their minds
about being civil on this forum.

Doing so will only invite a debunker Trojan Horse. It's too late for
niceties. Ge the forum back to its original intent and purpose.

Waste not any time on the uncivil and condescending pollyannas, trolls
and disrupters. They can spend their time debunking this forum on
THEIR site that is DEDICATED to debunking Y2K. This is not a
debunking Y2K forum.

You're being set-up and being pulled around by your nose with this
apologizing stint with Decker, and though your intentions are noble
and good, his consescending tone gives away his intent..You're being
PLAYED.

Do not negotiate with terrorists or debunking trolls.

You simply rid yourself and all of us of their scourge.

Keep your chin up girl. They attack you because you give them
quarter, they see a weak spot and are exploiting it.

You have nothing to apologize for. You IMO are the most level, fair
and gracious poster on this board. I hate to see what they are doing
with you.

Exasperated, you say... What's the point of this forum if you have to
weed through demouguoging sludge and debunking information from those
that are convinced Y2K is a non-issue and that we "doomers" are
cultists and dangerous? They want us to go away. They want this forum
stopped. Why do we have to tolerate them at all?

Yes, were ALL tired of the nonsense. But its really NOT a them
versus us world. Its all inclusive. Rather like Y2K and all its
myriad potentialities.

Do we have to tolerate the trash? No, in my opinion. Do we need to
be open to all sides of the Y2K issue? Well, that does see the
wiser thing to do. As long as it can remain reasonably, reasoned.

You say... Demanding specific rules of conduct and discussion is YOUR
RIGHT as a SYOP. If there are those that don't like it, they can move
and speak freely somewhere else. Freedom of speech is not limited to
Timebomb2000.

While that may be so in the literal sense, I look at what is supposed
to be my dual role here as more of being a caretaker, combined with my
personal researching preference as an Information Navigator.

Pretty much it has been everybodys forum. Its the way Ed let it
happen. Thats fine, with me to a point.

Where I and some others became very concerned, was when the repeated
attacking started after Ed left. Since then, things have gone in
waves.

As you say, This forum needs to get back to the intended audience and
mission it was started for.

I agree... but then we all... or at least most of us need to agree on
that as well.

You continue, I don't see ANY tolerance or freedom of expression over
at Debunkers or Biffy's...why should they demand it from us?

It certainly looks that way. Tis a puzzlement.

You finish with...Time to get back to the original intent of this
forum Diane. You've had my support for a long time...you still have
it. No need to apologize...it's time for tough love. You have nothing
to be guilty of. Let's do some good, weed-out the chaff and save some
lives.

Okay, but, that also need to be the individual choice of most the
posters here too. They and we are all what makes this place tick. Or
not. In the final analysis.

This entire thread is becoming some sort of mindgame that is being manipulated by the Master Troll -- Decker (and now his less polished understudy, Paul Davis). Don't take my word for it, just go to that stupid "debunking" site, where they are doing nearly live coverage and laughing their troll heads off.

Honest disagreement about what Y2K means, and what it will bring is something that all of us can handle, I am sure. But dealing with trolls like Decker and the rest of them does not even apply. The evidence of Decker talking "out of both sides of his mouth" as the saying goes (Andy's "double Decker" nickname is quite applicable) has been repeatedly documented. Again, just look at the "de-bunking" forum, see it for yourself.

Its as bad as Decker saying to the other trolls, "Watch what I am going to do", then he does it, then he reports back, "Wasn't that great? Now watch this, I'm going to 'apologize', and lets see if they buy it".

Decker is a troll. The most brilliant of them, who delights in causing turmoil to undermine the purpose of a Y2K preparation forum. Why? Many have suggested he is actually paid to do it. Personally, I think he just does it for the challenge. No matter.

Decker has offered to leave if the charter for the Yourdon forum be amended to more strongly emphasize that it is strictly for Y2K PREPARATION and nothing else. With just half a year left, I would recommend doing so -- that would probably go a long way to solve a lot of problems.

As you said... Your early posts were filled with a lot of oneness,
and advancing in the spirit ideas. Now I don't know about you, but I
don't know of any spiritual system in the world that approves of the
type of personality changes you have gone through in the last 6
months. I urge you to step back and relax for a while, go on a retreat
or something. If you keep this up, you will have a nervous breakdown
before 1/1/2000 gets here. ... You are probably going to take this as
a personal attack. It isn't. I really am concerned about you.

Thank you for your concern. I agree, a short retreat, is in order.
And I dont feel much oneness at the moment. More like splinters.

Since I came on last October, I have ceased to be a newbie. Do you
remember the absolutely viscous attacks I received then? And they
have continued, as they still do. It didnt/doesnt seem to matter,
if Im more spirit-oriented or devolve into being less so with each
story posted or each report researched. The attacks continue.

Like so many of us, we all see the potential harm Y2K repercussions
can do to our local areas, or national and international ones.

There is more cover-up and spin and hiding and vested interests going
on at all levels of our society, than most of us had any idea of, and
that studying the Y2K issues have brought to the surface of our
consciousness.

It looks to be a regular mess. And may be come more so, as the next
months roll by.

Actually, Id like an end the game. But that cannot happen, unless
and until, they stop... or the the regular posters here say ENOUGH.
Back to Y2K.

You say... You're wasting your time apologizing all over the place to
these people.

Maybe yes, maybe no. Actually, Im more apologizing to the regular
posters HERE, and explaining how this evolved, so we can all, those
that choose to do so, start paddling in the downstream direction.

As you state... They are not governed by decency or ethics, they are
on a mission to destroy, debunk and divide this forum. In their eyes,
those that hold Y2K is going to be a problem are EVIL, and need to be
silenced. That's their agenda, that's their mission. You're not going
to change their minds about being civil on this forum.

Im not trying to change their minds, they wont change. But we can.

Id like support in changing ours. Yes, most, not all, there want to
destroy this place. Theyve made some inroads. But nothing that
cant be changed by us, as a group, if we choose to be resilient.

King of Spain,
The mindgame may appear to be manipulated by them. But its not.
Ill go over and look later, maybe tomorrow, but the truth is, if
because of this, they OUT themselves. Then... thats perfect.

And about time.

You indicate... Decker has offered to leave if the charter for the
Yourdon forum be amended to more strongly emphasize that it is
strictly for Y2K PREPARATION and nothing else. With just half a year
left, I would recommend doing so -- that would probably go a long way
to solve a lot of problems.

Well, I would say, its up to the Forum if we choose to permit Mr.
Decker or anyone else to dictate... terms.

How come Dreck always ends up making himself out to be a victim? He
blames the people who flame him for his loss of temper. See what you
made him do? You broke his cookie and he got mad. This is a spoiled
child who is used to getting his way by tantrum and manipulation. He
won't quit unless you agree with him. He wants to be banned from this
board so he can say "See, I told you so." Even before he posted here,
he scorned the founder of this board and, by extension, the forum
participants. Dreck has not changed his mind and is here to show us
the error of our ways --

http://www.smu.edu/cgi-bin/Nova/get/gn/901/2.html

Under the rules of logic, the person making the assertion has the
burden
of proof. Clearly, Mr.
Yourdon is the one suggesting that January 1, 2000, will change the
status quo. He has the burden
of proof... a burden he has failed to bear.

Many of his "followers" use the same logical fallacy... challenge
nonbelievers to "prove" devices
will work after the Y2K deadline. They also use speculation,
suspicion
and conjecture rather than
data. "I think there's a chance" is subsituted for "I have
definitively
proven."

Mr. Yourdon also has tried to leave himself an "out." We can call
this
the "Jennifer Defense" after
his daughter.

"It's your decision."

If you use your non-related reputation as a computer programmer to
raise
anxiety and profit from
the results of the fearmongering... you are trying influence the
decision. At the very least, it is the
ages old American practice of Hucksterism.

Mr. Decker

http://www.smu.edu/cgi-bin/Nova/get/gn/814/2.html

Date: Feb 26, 14:14

Next week, the Masked Economist will weigh on the Jennifer Yourdon
letter. I did read the first
few pages... and she may be an economist. She has an inflated sense
of
her own knowledge and
no sense of humor... almost certain signs (laughter).

I love this quote, "... he is not a trained economist. I am. Are
you?"
Economics debate, my friends,
has moved to the local playground.

One cannot dispute her admiration of her father, a man who's
"expertise
in various areas of
technology... is generally undisputed." One can only hope she never
stumbles onto this forum.

If you have the patience to read her entire letter, you can easily
see
why economics is called the
"dismal science." We are an unforgiveably boring lot. In the words of
a
distinguished colleague,
"Economic theory can be divided into two categories: 1) obvious 2)
wrong." In another era, "If
you laid every economist end to end, you wouldn't reach a
conclusion."
(My end-of-the-week
economist humor.)

Back to Ms. Yourdon, to do her justice, I really need to wade through
her entire missive. A
thoughtful response is better than a "shoot from the hip" critique.
Please be patient as I enjoy an
Internet-free weekend in the country."

"I see you saying this again and again, tell me Ray, who is stopping you from doing that? "

Unc D you dope, show me where I said this two other times!!

With regard to Cherri, she made a commitment after which she spent an enormous amount of time spewing out her BS on this forum and then trashed her commitment. She simply was not professionally up to the task.

Sir I am very concerned about *you*. You're worried the forum
moderators will delete the 'Project Sunburst' thread as if someone
here is a member of that group or that people here condone that type
of behavior. Not true.

You worry that unnamed persons start new threads and post messages
here just to push any good news articles posted about Y2k out of
sight. Nope. This is a busy forum.

You find it unusual that the top six posters to TB2000 have
contributed 11% of the messages. I'd wager the top six posters at
GNIABFI or Debunking have posted more than 11% of its messages.

You've lurched from being worried about Y2k to being worried about
Y2k panic. The news about Y2k is good isn't it? Cheer up! Don't worry
about panic.

I don't actually want Decker to go. His covert posts and skilled
ability to hide behind his "Mister Manners" mask, only helps me to
root out which of our like minded folk, are gullible. Plus, he's so
incredibly shallow and insincere I find it amusing. "He has a good
mind and offers well spoken conversation" Should this justify
overlooking his obvious two-faced character defect? Wheeeewwwww. Hope
some will be able to choose up teams of potentially needed support
groups *far* better than that in the future, if required. Is this a
personal attack? You betcha, take it like a man. I'm off to shovel
mud.......out of my creek-flooded barn, that is!!!!!!

[Hardliner, IMHO I believe that time grows short with regard to y2k
and that our efforts should be directed at asisting others to
understand the potential gravity of the situation. In addition we
should be helping everyone in their preparations.
Ray

-- Ray (ray@totacc.com), June 30, 1999.]

and again,

[Flint, THANKS for including me with the likes of Andy, King of Spain
and Will Continue, it is indeed an HONOR!!.
With the LITTLE time left that we have I think we should devote it to
SERIOUS discussion of y2k and preparations.
Your Pal, Ray

-- Ray (ray@totacc.com), July 01, 1999.]

That's two in two days, not exactly what you requested, but time is
short Ray, it's a wastin' and you should be talking about preps and
the serious issues of Y2K rather than this foolishness. Please stop
it now, and move on to the subject of beans.

Mac -- should have known, with a name like yours. Yes, Drambuie for
Ms. S in a mini-balloon, slightly warmed by the palm of the hand, held
in the mouth just a wee bit too long -- nectar of the gods. Those
Scots, up there in the peat country, know what to do about lack of
creature comforts! Mac, it's about time you started a thread on
essential stash booze.

I will say this... Diane had the personal integrity to apologize.
And I look forward to her studious avoidance of the word "troll."

Obviously, not everyone shares her willingness to step forward. As
to some of the individual comments. "Spain," I look forward to an
honest disagreement, however, it would require you taking a position
on Y2K... not just posting your personal opinion of me. I will look
for your statement on a new thread. By the way, you have your
wish... a Y2K preparation forum. It's not of particular interest to
me, but I wish the new forum well.

"There is more cover-up and spin and hiding and vested interests
going on at all levels of our society, than most of us had any idea
of, and that studying the Y2K issues have brought to the surface of
our consciousness." I'd love to see your hard evidence of this cover-
up, Diane. Seriously.

"As you state... They are not governed by decency or ethics, they
are on a mission to destroy, debunk and divide this forum. In their
eyes, those that hold Y2K is going to be a problem are EVIL, and need
to be silenced. That's their agenda, that's their mission. You're not
going to change their minds about being civil on this forum."

I think little is accomplished by the "us" versus "them" rhetoric.
The people I actually met in Virginia were pleasant and quite
sincere. They were certainly not evil. I think the forum will
benefit from dropping the "they are out to destroy us" nonsense.

For the record, I did not blame others for my poor behavior. I took
responsibility for my actions. Long before I started trading verbal
punches, I tolerated a fair amount of personal attacks. This does
not make me a victim nor am I crying foul. The baseless personal
attacks were far more damaging to the credibility of the attacks than
to me personally.

I forgot this and damaged my own credibility in the process.

And thank you, Outings, for being such a studious reader of my
posts. I just wish you'd actually read my posts with a open mind
instead of scanning for material you think you can use against me.

AS I recall, the denizens of this forum were blithely running on at
the mouth errr keyboard, about the probability of an end to a world
system as we know it, as well as questioning what we knew and what we
suspected; and, POOF!, out of the cyber-ether, came some folks who
were highly intent on changing what went on here. Granted, the first
time your name graced this forum, it was under a rather, shall we say
shaddowed, auspice? You were not loath to follow it up.

Later, several folks decided that it might be either fun or was their
Divine Calling to cause serious problems here, unto the demise of
this forum. I could provide links to statements which would
establish the motives and goals, but these have been provided
already.

Prior to the appearance of the folks with the specific agenda of
destroying the forum or damaging its credibility, and readability, we
had had several juvenalian attempts at intelectual masturbation, and
a few at repetitive obscenity. We dealt with them in fairly summary
fashion. We have NOT dealt with the postings by those whose avowed
purposes have been the destruction or devolution of this forum in
anywhere NEAR the same summary fashion.

Given the fairly exhaustive documentation of the goals of the
denizens of the "Other Y2K Forum", p'raps this defensiveness, which
has NOT been taken to its logical conclusion is both justified and
WARRANTED.

This is a public forum created by an open invitation. (See Ed
Yourdon's home page.) When I attend a public gathering and someone
is telling a story about how the local bank is going to fail... I
will speak up, particularly if I have knowledge of the local bank and
the basis of the story is "there's this guy who has a friend whose
wife's brother works with a guy who used to work at the bank.
According to this guy. I'm sure he knows what he's talking about.
The bank manager is stealing money to finance a run for mayor." This
is the quality of some Y2K "evidence."

There has been ONE conversation documented about the "destruction" of
this forum and it may or may not have been a tongue-in-cheek
exchange. I respectfully suggest you dig up any other evidence you
have, because one exchange between two people is mighty thin.

I have been accused of wanting to "destroy" the forum. This is
patently false. I simply present an alternative viewpoint. This is
frustrating because often people cannot argue with the substance of
my writing... so they have chosen to attack me instead. The same has
happened to Flint, Paul Davis, Hoffmiester, Norm and other
individuals.

Please show me a list of these agitators, Night Train. Where are
these people with the "avowed" rabble rousers? Where is your
exhaustive documentation. Don't mention it unless you can bring it
to the table.

Now that were chums, I just dont feel comfortable in calling you Mr.
Decker. I seems so supercilious among friends, agreed? That and come
to find out youre more than a decade younger than me, well, it seems
kinda ludicrous. Ya know?

Now, about my comment... "There is more cover-up and spin and hiding
and vested interests going on at all levels of our society, than most
of us had any idea of, and that studying the Y2K issues have brought
to the surface of our consciousness."

And your response... I'd love to see your hard evidence of this
cover- up, Diane. Seriously.

Seriously, Ken... should you consider purchasing a pair of bi-focals
any time soon? Kinda concerned about your depth perception.

Kindly then... since in the mid-1970s, I was once a High School
English Teacher. Ill do you a favor and hint you in the direction
of the TimeBomb 2000 archives. With over 140,000 posts since the
forums inception, I would guesstimate that about half of them will
lay the foundation for the hard evidence. Take some time out this
July 4th weekend, sip a little wine, and bring yourself up-to-speed on
the Y2K situation. Once youve accomplished that assignment, let me
know, and well them have a common analysis background to serve as
the basis for further discussions.

Fair, enough?

On to your comment.. I think the forum will benefit from dropping the
"they are out to destroy us" nonsense. Yes, I agree.

Did you have that little chat yet with Doc Paulie about his approach
to MIT in the effort to shut down this Forum? Sure would appreciate
if youd report back to us. Then perhaps we could stamp this naughty
little issue... case closed.

Now lets get cozy Ken. Uh, thats NOT a corinne invitation, BTW.

Your heartfelt statement.... Long before I started trading verbal
punches, I tolerated a fair amount of personal attacks, is something
I can REALLY relate to, Ken.

Just between, you, me and the fencepost, theres a few folks over at
that other place you post at frequently, that really annoy a lot of
people over here. In fact, they are downright vicious. One of cprs
hot links to a Thomas Chittium (-1 sp) connects with a person who, uh,
for the sake of argument, used to harass us here quite a bit. Me in
particular. We suspected at the time, that he first landed as
William Casey Jr. and later morphed into Jimmy Bagga Doughnuts,and
than hed been eating one too many frosted doughnuts. Sugar rush.
But, to quote Koskinen... Who knows for sure.

At any rate, INVAR launched into him real good, and he only lunks now
and then, at least in that identity, and posts occasionally... like a
couple days ago. (Thats when INVAR the gundark starts to growl from
afar again, and well... cant say how long it would before the rope
got untied and hed devour JBD like yesterdays cinnamon roll). Since
then various forms of Ts have haunted this place. And, oddly
enough, many hang out over there.

But, Ken, I understand. Those kinds of experiences are a lot to
continue tolerating, and we have some folks here who could take a
valium or two as well. I can sympathize with how you tripped over the
deep end and started lashing out at everyone on this thread...

Yes, you did damage your credibility quiet a bit. Again, we can all
relate. Mi tambien. Its good to see you take responsibility for
your baseless personal attacks and poor behavior. Good job... At
least you had the personal integrity to apologize too, sorta. Kudos!

Now, if youd really like to earn your Boy Scout merit badge, and
redeem your TBY2K Forum stripes, so-to-speak, see what you can do
about the Ts over at Doc and cprs hang out. They are welcome to
post here, if they play nice.

Your ACTIONS, in assisting this endeavor, would speak louder than
words. Volumes, in fact.

With regards to the T word... and new choices... or if preferred
semantics, we really need to find common ground and agree on what to
call the combined--hecklers, flamers, attackers, disruptors, etc.--
since were both gonna stop using the word... TROLL. Right?

So following (below), are some options. My three favorites are:

1st Choice: pigwidgeon

2nd Choice: barghest

3rd Choice: tempus fugit

Lets make this a win-win situation, Ken.

You also pick the words you think are most representative, describing
the actions of the Ters... and well see if we cant agree on a
working word. Or not.

[Adverbs] swiftly; with speed; apace; at a great rate, at full speed,
at railway speed; full drive, full gallop; posthaste, in full sail,
tantivy; trippingly; instantaneously [more].

under press of sail, under press of canvas, under press of sail and
steam; velis et remis, on eagle's wing, in double quick time; with
rapid strides, with giant strides; a pas de geant; in seven league
boots; whip and spur; ventre a terre; as fast as one's legs will carry
one, as fast as one's heels will carry one; as fast as one can lay
legs to the grount, at the top of one;s speed; by leaps and bounds;
with haste [more].

[Phrases] vires acquirit eundo; "I'll put a girdle about the earth in
forty minutes" [M. [Nouns]D.]; "swifter than arrow from the Tartar's
bow" [M. [Nouns]D.]; go like a bat out of hell; tempus fugit.

"One guided by ideals; especially : one that places ideals before
practical considerations." In Y2K terms, those who contend there
will be no problems.

"Optimist"

One inclined "to put the most favorable construction upon actions and
events or to anticipate the best possible outcome." In Y2K terms,
this is the "bump in the road" crowd.

"Realist"

One with a "concern for fact or reality and rejection of the
impractical and visionary." In Y2K terms, this is the Ed Yardeni
position. Recession, possible depression.

"Pessimist"

One inclined "to emphasize adverse aspects, conditions, and
possibilities or to expect the worst possible outcome." This
describes many of the moderate posters on this forum who anticipate
serious negative impacts, but well short of social and economic
meltdown. [I commonly use the term rather than "Doomer."]

"Survivalist"

"One who views survival as a primary objective; especially : one who
has prepared to survive in the anarchy of an anticipated breakdown of
society." In Y2K terms, these folks believe the chance of meltdown
is worth making very extensive preparations. [Because some people
react to 'survivalist,' I often use the term serious pessimist.]

"Fatalist"

One who feels "events are fixed in advance so that human beings are
powerless to change them; also : a belief in or attitude determined
by this doctrine." In Y2K terms, this is a Gary North position.

Honestly, I feel there are very few fatalists.

To your other comments. I have read a large amount of information on
Y2K. I'd say the positive information outweighs the negative. Most
of the negative data on Y2K is speculative. Of course, most of the
postive information is self-reported. Despite my extensive reading I
cannot find sufficient data to warrant the conclusions of the
pessimists. In fact, the flow of information since the first of the
year has been trending positive. There is no solid evidence the
"iron triangle" will fail.

I posted on Debunker asking folks to talk about "destroying" this
forum. While my first instinct is that your claim is something of a
straw man, I am willing to explore the issue. See my post on
Debunker.

Oh, and how do you feel about Andy, Ray, Will Continue, a, and the
pessimists who engage in ongoing personal attacks?

I will not hold your degree in English against you. (humor) I think
you might consider "troll" as a verb. (To fish by trailing a lure or
baited hook from a moving boat.) I have no problem with
characterizing an obvious attempt at "baiting" as trolling...
although it is often difficult to judge intent. Fishing for
responses is far different than being a ugly creature who lives under
a bridge. Agreed? The best reponse to "trolling" is to ignore the
post. Even dedicated fisherman move on when the fish aren't biting.
Calling someone a "troll," however, serves little purpose, don't you
think?

Your confusion does not surprise me, particularly given your previous
comparsion of the "trolls" on this forum to the Nazi brownshirts.
Since you know Shakespeare, you might ask how your Jewish friends how
they feel about the term "Shylock." I can see a post as "trolling,"
i.e. fishing for responses. Calling someone a "troll" is just a
personal attack. While this is a slippery concept for you, Old Git,
it is possible to disagree with what some says without impugning the
person. Do you use "jew" to describe haggling for a lower price? Do
you think this phrase is offensive? As you can tell, I have not
forgotten your earlier comments and I respectfully ask you consider
an apology for what I feel was a slur and remarks that can only be
considered grossly insensitive to the Jewish people.

First you scream your bleedin' head off about censorship and how
wrong it is, and then you come back and ask that the terms, "troll",
"polly" and "doomer" be censored from this forum!

Next you suggest, imply or otherwise attempt to convince us that
the terms, "shylock" and "jew" should be censored as they are somehow
offensive.

Do you have the foggiest idea what you're talking about? (or maybe
do you know exactly what you're doing?)

One characteristic that is common to each and every one of your
postings is that you attempt to manipulate the thoughts, speech or
actions of those who populate this forum. To the best of my
knowledge, you have never told us why you are here.

I see you as a gentle, caring and spiritual soul who would be a
credit to any forum, but I would suggest to you that those very
qualities that make you so attractive as a person also make you very
vulnerable to such as Mister Decker.

We would all do well to recall the story of the young Commanche who
found an injured rattlesnake and nursed it back to health.

As you would expect, one day after the snake had healed, he bit the
boy.

"Why did you bite me after I so lovingly nursed you back to
health", the dying young brave asked?

"The institution, system, or practice of censoring : the actions or
practices of censors; especially : censorial control exercised
repressively."

Censor (verb)

"To examine in order to suppress or delete anything considered
objectionable."

Hello, Hardliner.

I asked Diane (my new pal) to refrain from using the term "troll." A
polite request is not censorship. (See the above definition.) I did
NOT ask her to exercise her power as a moderator to delete the term
"troll" from anyone's posts. That would be censorship.

Personally, I think it would be nice if people avoided slurs,
particularly those referring to race, religion, sexuality, etc. I
think "Shylock" and "jew" (used as a verb) are offensive. I found
Old Git's comparison of "trolls" to Nazi brownshirts offensive.
While I think such slurs are ugly, I do not support censorship. On
the other hand, I can certainly ask people (including Diane) to
refrain.

If Diane felt I was being manipulative, I will gladly discuss the
issue with her. Diane? I do admire her willingness to apologize and
wish more individuals demonstrated her character.

I present a viewpoint, Hardliner. You may agree or disagree, but
this is a marketplace of ideas. You don't need to buy what I am
selling... nor does anyone else. As for my motivations, I have
answered that question on several occasions. I do not represent any
interests nor have I ever received compensation for writing or other
activity associated with Y2K. If someone actually wishes to meet me
in person, I can provide adequate proof of my claims. I am here
because I find Y2K interesting. I think my views on Y2K are valid
and that I represent an alternative to the serious pessmists. I have
recieved a number of warm and supportive emails from people who are
reluctant to post on this forum. They do not wish to be attacked by
the forum bullies, but they appreciate my (usually) reasonable
posts. I have no plans to visit the new preparation forum. As long
as this remains an open forum, I will remain.

By the way, I do appreciate when you simply make your point. It is
far easier to read than the red/black sentence-by-sentence commentary
on my posts.

I refuse to get into another slanging match with you, Decker. I have
explained myself once; I do not intend to explain myself again.
However, you have ascribed to me a certain monstrous tenet (to-wit,
anti-Semitism) which I do not hold, and which you cannot demonstrate I
hold, I must inform you that you are flirting with libel.

http://www.cyberlibel.com/libel.html
The classic definition of libel is: "a publication without
justification or lawful excuse which is calculated to injure the
reputation of another by exposing him to hatred, contempt or
ridicule."
(Parke, B. in Parmiter v. Coupland (1840) GM&W
105 at 108)

[Decker, I believe your post was calculated to injure my reputation by
exposing me to hatred, contempt or ridicule.]

In a libel action, the plaintiff must prove three
elements of the tort of libel:

The statement has been made to a third party.

The statement referred to the plaintiff. (This does
not
mean that the statement has to refer expressly to the
plaintiff. A statement can be actionable if it is
reasonably capable of referring to the plaintiff).
The statement must be defamatory, which means that it
must be a false statement to the plaintiff's
discredit.
[I believe your post fulfills all three criteria. Bear in mind, I am
not an attorney and am not giving you legal advice.]

I use neither "Shylock" nor "Jew" to describe my financial
transactions; it is sufficient to tell people I was brought up in
Yorkshire, whose reputation for thrift renders Scots and Jews akin to
the most profligate of spendthrifts.

Due to my extensive reading I find sufficient data to warrant the
conclusions of many of the pessimists. In fact, the flow of spin
since the first of the year has certainly been trending positive,
while digging deeper it becomes more negative... in areas...
especially the international scene. There is enough solid indicators
that *some* mild to extreme problems will occur within the "iron
triangle" and unknown local parts... globally... may fail.

It seems likely we will NEVER agree on this. I can live with
it. Hope you can. Or not.

I posted on Debunker asking folks to talk about "destroying" this
forum. While my first instinct is that your claim is something of a
straw man, I am willing to explore the issue. See my post on
Debunker. -- Ken

Fortunately, to relieve your mind, because I KNOW you were concerned
about Docs blatant attempts at censorship here, I chatted with Phil
Greenspun directly about this. Not to worry. Were fine. Its
chaff, blowing in the wind.

How do you feel about Andy, Ray, Will Continue, a, and the pessimists
who engage in ongoing personal attacks? -- Ken

Well, well see. I can say something, but in the end they are
responsible for their own posts. You might better ask me how I feel
about the continued pigwigeon vandals and their continued attacks on
me. But, I didnt expect you to be concerned... yet.

The best response to "trolling" is to ignore the post. Even dedicated
fisherman move on when the fish aren't biting. Calling someone a
"troll," however, serves little purpose, don't you think? -- Ken

Mostly yes, sometimes no. Ive noticed that common wisdom is to
ignore them, in anticipation that theyll go away. Doesnt seem to be
happening. Perhaps you might hold a pow-wow at De Bunker, and
encourage they stick to Y2K issues. Or stay home.

Andy,

Chill out, please. Your being a tad pigwidgeonish. Check the Rogets
Thesaurus and find a more descriptive yet palatable word. Surprise
Ken. There is some dazzling terminology out there, that doesnt
offend gentler souls.

Hardliner,

I simply apologized to him. And he to me.

My opinion of him and his actions hasnt changed one iota. Were
chumming now... for a change of pace.

Thank you for the reminder of the snake. I prefer to observe
sidewinders, in action, and allow others to judge for themselves,
rather than nurse them. The most powerful healing, is always self-
healing.

Old Git,

Kens just having a pigwidgeon moment. They sneak up on him from time
to time.

my OValtINe seCReT MesSAge deCODeR!!!!!! mY KeYS!!!!!!! sOMe haIR In
thE DRaiN!!!!!! mY YouTHfuL FIguRE!!!!!! tIDIngs Of JoY!!!!! gEMs oF
WIsdoM!!!!!!! prESEntS For THe ToTs!!!!!! aND gOOd wILL toWArdS
ManKInd!!!!!!!!

Since this thread seems to be going on FOREVER, I thought I might ask
a question, Diane. Do you remember when the subject came up that the
torch had been passed on to some folks on this forum and I responded
that my bet would be that Diane Squire and A&L (sorry....those names
are so unusual to me that I always fear spelling them incorrectly.)
You responded at that time that I was incorrect, yet you've now come
out and stated that Ed asked you to carry the torch personally.

Um...why did you lie to me? If it was to protect your anony...I
can't spell that either...I can understand. I'm just kindof curious
at this point. You needn't respond publicly if you so wish. You're
already aware that my E-mail address is real.

Because at the time, I preferred to remain anonymous, until a cohesive
team of Moderators could develop and we could figure out where we
needed to go with Y2K news, information, discussions and preparations.
It was a tumultuous time, to say the least. And, I didnt know if I
was going to keep it, or pass the lead baton to someone else.

Had I announced then, my fear was the sharks would have instituted a
feeding frenzy. I didn't care to hang a shingle out that said "shark
bait." I felt it would have forced Y2K issues off topic on the Forum,
IMHO. Some of the Moderators did not agree with my choice, but they
supported it. Others understood completely.

Gradually, the Forum is now evolving and finding it's new feet. So is
the MoD team, so are Sysop #2 and myself, and so all the regular
posters, and even the Chat groups, as well. Weve had a rash of
disruptors, for various reasons, and learning how to deal with them,
by making mistakes in some cases and not in others, was part of the
process. And its not over by any stretch. More mistakes will likely
be made. Its how we learn. Its called Life 101.

Now is the time to focus on the Y2K end-game. Before the next
beginning.

BTW, quite early on, the moderators discussed the need for two forums
one devoted to preparation information, and a place where newcomers
could be helped (without the wild and wooleyness of TBY2K Classic).
That need came out of reading the 200 or so back channel e-mail
messages which flew around that first weekend Ed said Sayonara. It's
been a repeated request of regulars, so, the time is now.

Focus.

Countdown to 2000 begins. Again.

Besides, we expect another flood of people in the fall wondering
"what" specifically to do, as more and more details of local
readiness... or not... rise to the surface. Y2K news during September
and October may well indicate how this is all going to go... locally,
nationally and... the "big" one... internationally.

Now, if you want to yell... But Diane, you lied to me! Go ahead
and yell it, Anita. Fine. Get over it. I had my reasons and they
were hopefully sound ones. Or not. Time will tell.

Now, I have a question for you. Did you write that initial message to
me on the Dear Diane thread?

no diane - I wrote that initial post. And I would like to take the
time now to say thank you for taking that post to heart. in fact -
everyone seems to be on much better behavior in the last 50 (?) post.

"A valid comparison can be made between the trolls and the early
actions of the Brownshirts. Borrowing from your somewhat stretched
analogy, one could even go so far as to say troll attacks on this
forum are a verbal version of Krystallnacht, when the Brownshirts
broke the windows (and many heads) of Jewish businesses. Intimidation
is intimidation, no matter how it's delivered--in a poison ivy of
prose or at the end of a cudgel."

(http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=000vBM)

Much ink has been expended on how the Nazis expertly employed
cultural stereotypes and incendiary, derogatory terms to further
their propaganda mission. Whether your statement can be characterized
as anti-semetic is subject to interpretation. To cavalierly
appropriate the language and imagery of the Holocaust to prop up your
own irrational bias against minority expression is, however,
certainly offensive.

Thanks, Diane. No more need be said on the subject as far as I'm
concerned. As justme pointed out, I was NOT the poster who started
that other thread. I've never used another name besides Anita when
posting. I stopped using my last name both because I got lazy and
because I was tired of my imposters slopping my name around the
forum. It's not like anyone can't tell what it is from my E-mail
address, though, eh? (grin)

I'd actually successfully ignored this thread I'm on now until I
became curious last night as to why it's continued so long.

AL, I take it you have read the entire post, which attempted to
demonstrate that, left unchecked, bullies can and do grow up to commit
the most heinous of atrocities. If anyone interprets my post as
being anti-Semitic, demonstrating insensitivity to a minority, or
demeaning the Holocaust itself, then I am afraid there is nothing
further I can say to convince you that none of those interpretations
are accurate.

There seems to be a small but determined effort to portray me as an
insensitive person at the least and a
white supremacist at the worst, and I regret you fell into that trap.
Nothing could be further from the truth, as regular Yourdonites
know.

That "thought" is so far from the truth that it's just plain
ludicrous.

How's the garden growing? Enjoying the weekend?

Yesterday went up to San Francisco to the Golden Gate bridge to watch
the Tall Ships parade enter the Bay. They are the old 3 & 4 masted
square-rigged sailing vessels. Quite a site!

There were tug boats doing the water fan thing leading the parade, the
Coast Guard Cutter The Eagle, an enormous 3 master lead the parade, TV
helicoptors spun noisily for ariel shots, on the ground TV crews were
capturing the moment. Many of the vessels used for cadet training, had
the young sailors standing aloft up in the rigging. on top of the
square rigging and way on the top of the mast heads. Signal flags
were flying, all nation's flags, and some sail boatss in support flew
American flags instead of sails.

It seemed like every sailboat, powerboat, and anything that rowed, had
emptied out of every Marina around to support the parade. Even an old
WWII battle ship the Jeramiah O'Brian, one of the last Liberty ships,
sailed out to greet the incoming Tall Ships. A real time-warp
juxtaposition of maritime "changes."

Question:
(1) What is the reason there are three stripes on the back of a
chipmonk found in USA & India ?
(2) Why Chipmonk's tail is short(Approx. 6") in USA but but Chipmonk
of India has almost a foot long tail?

Answers:
Chipmonk found in India are blessed by God RAMA as narrated in the
epic Ramayana by the sage Valmiki. (This epic is also translated
in English and German Language) Rama did not get chance to bless
Chipmonk of America!
Rama during his forest journey found a Chipmonk on his path. Rama
was careful not to crush it. Therefore, Rama picked up the Chipmonk on
his left hand and he used his right hand to move it from it's head to
tail to bless it!
Rama's supernatural powers not only blessed this chipmonk but his
fingers made permanent pigmentation mark or stripes on it's body!
Since that time the Chipmonk in India has the three longitudinal
stripes on it's body or back! The Chipmonk in India has long tail due
to this blessing of Rama. The long tail allows it to jump from one
tree onto another tree when it has to protect itself from the
predators! Unfortunately this was not the case with Chipmonks of
America!
It may interest you to learn why Rama was in Forest at the time?
When prince Rama was sent in Dandaka forest for fourteen years of
sojourn by his step mother, Kaikai. She had forced King Dashratha to
send prince Rama into forest so that her son, prince Bharat, can
become King to rule Ayoudhya (Capital City) upon the death of King
Dashratha.
Rama had all the supernatural-Spritual qualities and magnanimity to
obey his father's last death wish before King Dashratha died. Refer to
further reading or books available at the Vedanta Society in N.Y. or
San Francisco.
Story by Dil Gaekwar.